Firstly to respond to a point made in your post “I hope the gym can educate their workers on the fact that climbing is a very subjective activity and there are many ways to do certain thing and not just ONE method” if you are referring to ‘safety’ I do not entirely share this opinion, to explain why refer to the instructional booklet that accompanies all climbing equipment of which details in very specific terms the ‘do’s & don’ts’ of the particular hardware. Whilst climbers may choose to interrupt or disregard the advice given, Camp5 will always take the position of the manufacturer.

A classic example of misuse is evident with the Grigri, often climbers inhibit the cam in order to give rope to a lead climber, however in the instructional booklet such action is highlighted as very unsafe. Climber’s reluctance to heed this warning has resulted a sufficient number of accidents to force Petzl (the manufacturer) to invest in a worldwide campaign to stop climbers from practicing this habit.

Of your case in particular I understand that the method of belay you were using was in question. I will refer to the style you used as the ‘pinch’ technique; a method in which the belayer pulls slack though the belay device keeping both brake rope and live rope parallel, then pinches the brake rope with the same hand that’s holding the live rope freeing the brake hand to reposition or slide down the brake rope to the device from which position the belayer can then take rope again and repeat the process.

This belay technique is most prevalently used (and in some cases still taught) in USA. Though whilst attending the 2008 Climbing Wall Association Summit in Boulder, Colorado, the unanimous feedback I received from those I spoke to, of the 200+ attending climbing wall managers and instructors, is that efforts are being made to curb and eventually replace this technique.

To illustrate the danger of this technique we should first consider its origins. Prior to the invention of the belay device, the HMS knot (otherwise known as the Munter or Italian Hitch:Left) was used in combination with a HMS carabiner for the purpose of belay. To maximize the rope friction created by the knot, both the brake and the live ropes need to be pulled in the same direction. Thus the pinch style of belay was born.

However most modern belay devices, in fact all that I know of (including autolocking devices like the Grigri) are designed so that the friction of the device is increased by pulling the brake rope in the opposite directions of the live rope. This consensus amongst climbing gym manufacturers is not by accident. The device is intentionally designed to work with the belayer natural reflex response; as an example, if I place a rope in your hand and I pull on that rope naturally you will pull in the opposite direction.

Now I am aware that supporters of pinch technique would argue that they still pull down on the brake rope when a climber falls. And it is by this statement that the answer to ‘why the pinch technique is not the safest method belay’ is revealed. Since the default position of the pinch technique, with the brake and live rope parallel, effective disables the belay device, the safety of the falling climbing then relies entirely on the attentiveness of the belayer. If distracted or caught off guard the fall of the climber would pull the brake rope though the device at such speeds that if the belayer has not already let go, the rope burn on the hand will ensure they do.

Given that it is human nature to fall prey to lapses of concentration, the reliance of vigilant attentiveness is the Achilles heal of the pinch technique. Yes it may not have resulted in an accident yet, I’m sure a great many would reinforce you on this point, but consider the alternative, what if tomorrow, or next week or 2 years from now it didn’t?

If you would like to read more on this topic I can strongly recommend the following PDF downloads (in German – however I am working on a English translation).

German Article 1

German Article 2

The articles are written based on independent studies of accidents and reveals that the No 1 cause of a climber hitting the deck is unsafe belay practices including the pinch technique.

It is from such resources that we inform our staff of concerns that need to be addressed. We understand that criticism is not always readily received, but it is our mission as a company to support the sustainability of the sport by doing whatever we can to steer climbers away from potential hazards.

Jeremy Peet
Camp5 Director

Regards,
putra@putraclimb.com